Thursday, April 08, 2010

You know all those Jewish holocaust art cases, the ones where Jewish Billionaire families obtain works of art from public museums that innocently paid taxpayer money for them? These are works that had been sold at auction in the 30s for fair market value. No wonder these families are so rich, they often triple dipped:

the seller received fair market value in the 30s (to be fair, sometimes this value was lower than it might have been in the best possible market due to the speed at which the sale had to be made);

the families then often received compensation for their various losses (unless the Israeli government, or the Jewish lawyers running the compensation scams, got their hands on it first!); and

they get the art back from the completely innocent public institution.

It should not surprise you in the least that these cases only work one way, if the 'victim' is Jewish. A public institution trying to use the same case law to recover art in the hands of a Jew is out of luck.

You know all those Jewish holocaust art cases, the ones where Jewish Billionaire families obtain works of art from public museums that innocently paid taxpayer money for them? These are works that had been sold at auction in the 30s for fair market value. No wonder these families are so rich, they often triple dipped:

the seller received fair market value in the 30s (to be fair, sometimes this value was lower than it might have been in the best possible market due to the speed at which the sale had to be made);

the families then often received compensation for their various losses (unless the Israeli government, or the Jewish lawyers running the compensation scams, got their hands on it first!); and

they get the art back from the completely innocent public institution.

It should not surprise you in the least that these cases only work one way, if the 'victim' is Jewish. A public institution trying to use the same case law to recover art in the hands of a Jew is out of luck.